CSUDH ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 5 2003

CSUDH Academic Senate Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, November 5, 2003

Voting Members Present: Anuakan, Chlebicki, Danis, Dowling, Eyadat, Feuer, Ganezer, Gasco, Goss, Gould, Greenwald, Han, Heinze-Balcazar, Heuschkel, Jacobs, Kaplan, Kowalski, Malamud, McDermott, Needham, Newton, Pu, Robles, Saunders, Smith, J., Smith, L., Turk, and Watson.

Voting Members Absent: Christie, Cokelez, Dominguez, Frickel, Furtado, Furusa, Jennings, Johnson, C., Long, McCarthy, McClane, Moy, Parker, Sheu, Todd, Vanterpool,

Valle, Waller, and Weber.

Non-Voting Ex-Officio Members Present: Bell-Waters, Bowman, Parham, Reyes,

Rodriguez, A., Strong, Walton, and Yao.

Guests: Cruise, Levine, Mellblom, and Pomerantz.

Call To Order at 2:40 p.m.

Approval of Agenda MSP

Approval of Minutes MSP As Amended

Reorganization

Chair Whetmore pointed out the document for consultation and reorganization, which was distributed today. There was a discussion about the problem with last Town Hall meeting being held on December 16 when faculty would be gone. If faculty are not on campus, how would they be able to give feedback regarding the proposed models for reorganization? The other problem was using the back to school meeting on January 20, 2004, to make an announcement about the final decisions. Again, faculty would be away from campus from mid-December through January 20, and would not be aware of the decisions that would be made.

Senator Greenwald asked Dr. Mori what was driving reorganization and Dr. Mori reminded all of us that there is a plethora of documentation from the past 10 years or so from the Delphi Report to the Moye Report and wanted to know if Greenwald had read any of the reports. Greenwald said yes. Mori said that 70% of the campus community that responded to surveys said they were concerned about the organizational structure. Mori said that a sufficient body of literature exists regarding reorganization. Mori also said that the goal of reorganization would not be to reduce unviable programs. Mori also said that faculty should send him any potential models that they might come up with and that he would look at them and take them into consideration. He also said that he was not going to change the plan that has been laid out for reorganization. Dr. Mori also said that he was aware that the timeline seemed short but that it would bring closure. He also pointed out that this issue was announced in August of 2003 and would be completed in January of 2004, and considering that there is ten years of history already, a 5 or 6-month timeline should suffice.

RTP Procedures

Whetmore said that last year the Senate passed two resolutions, FPC 02-15 -- RTP length and FPC 02-21-- Policy for retention, tenure, and promotion for probationary faculty. Many faculty are still confused about what model to use because a Presidential PM or Academic Affairs Memorandum has not been issued for either resolution, and so they are not policy yet.

Whetmore said that there are problems with the RTP review process and that he had heard that some letters of recommendation were submitted by evaluators prior to them reading the actual file and wanted to know if anyone had encountered this problem. Senator Malamud asked if the review timeline could be extended a bit longer. Currently he thought the process was about two weeks.

Senator Ganezer said that there was unfairness regarding the process of early tenure and promotion and that some departments would approve this process easily and others would not. He said that there was no uniformity. Senator Feuer suggested that a workshop be established for evaluators as well as those being evaluated. Whetmore asked the Senators to please email their ideas and thoughts regarding this issue, or to please use the discussion board on the Senate Web page.

TC 3:30 p.m. Provost’s Report

Provost Mori introduced the new Vice Provost Dr. Jaime Dote-Kwan to the Senate and welcomed her. Mori said that she would be involved in creating a new Academic Affairs Master Plan and also chair the Enrollment Management Council. He said that Dote-Kwan and Whetmore would co-chair the Academic Affairs Master Planning Committee.

The Provost also said that the University is going to develop a strategic plan for enrollment management. He said that the University did not reach its enrollment target for fall 2003 and was short in the summer of 2003. He said that for spring 2004 we would need to achieve at least 9000 FTES and that we do not want to fall below this number.

The Provost said that he wanted Academic Affairs to work with the Senate on all important issues. The Senate is the campus’s elected body and the campus community needs to pay attention to what is happening in the Senate. Senator Danis asked the Provost what the difference was between informing the Senate and consulting with the Senate and the Provost said that he works directly with the Executive Committee and he believes that the Executive Committee’s responsibility is to bring issues to the Senate floor.

EPC 03-15 Resolution to Change Policy for Withdrawal from a Course

EPC Chair Smith said that the University catalog clearly indicates that the student must initiate the procedure for dropping a course. He suggested that the procedure be changed by: (a) deleting the following passage—“Prior to the end of the second week of classes, an instructor may, by following the appropriate procedures, initiate a formal drop of students who: 1) have missed the first two class meetings of a term (or the first meeting of a class that meets only once a week) and 2) have not advised the instructor (or the department chair, if no instructor was assigned to the course in advance) that their absence is temporary” (2003-2004 Catalog, p. 63); and (b) adding the following passage—“It is the responsibility of the student to initiate a formal drop of a course. Students who do not attend a course for which they are registered during any day of the first week risk having their seat in the course given away by the instructor, and receiving a “WU” at the end of the course.”

Gould wanted to see data to back up this resolution. Malamud said that when we give students their registration let’s put a footnote indicating that it is their responsibility to drop their courses and he also suggested sending out an email. Malamud asked why the University could not give an NC for students who don’t show up. Feuer said that she is endorsing the principle of spreading this information so that students are aware. Senator Jacobs said that she was in favor of the resolution and said that it would be a good idea to put this information on course syllabi. Malamud also noted that the language on page 81 of the catalogue should be changed from “students shall decide” to “faculty or department chair shall decide”.

AVP Rodriguez was concerned about the language in the resolution. If a student has registered and paid for a course they are entitled to stay in the class. He said that we could not take a students out of a class that they have registered and paid for. Feuer said that the rosters faculty receive have a space to drop—Rodriguez said that’s okay to use unless it’s after the 3^rd week. Malamud asked if it hurt the University financially to drop students the first week. Rodriguez said yes it did hurt the University financially and that the refunds are prorated according to when the student drops. Whetmore asked Senators to forward emails to EPC Chair Smith regarding their ideas or to use the discussion board on the Senate web page.

Statewide Senate Report

Statewide Senator Smith said that they would meet in mid February of 2004 and that he was sending out information via email to the Senators.

Meeting Adjourned at 4:25p.m.

Respectfully Submitted By

________________________ _________________________

Mary E. Brooks Edd Whetmore

Tags: academic senate, wanted academic, november, senate, academic, csudh, meeting, wednesday, minutes